Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Arrogant? Or self aware enough to understand that she isn't any good in front of a camera, that these "debates" give undue prominence to lesser parties and always end up with everyone ganging up on the Tory? I don't agree with her decision, but I certainly don't agree with your description of her motives. Oh, and you know we've only been having TV "debates" for the last few elections? We managed perfectly well without them until 2010. Yep, they're a longstanding tradition of UK politics for an entire 7 years.

Snipped by me...

I think you have a point there but I don't think it's about 'in front of a camera' per se. Those close to her have repeatedly stated that she is no good at thinking on her feet and needs everything pre-prepared and scripted and is uncomfortable with anything else.

That is certainly how it appears from my observations as well and matches why she'd be reluctant to attend live debates and even reluctant to meet with the survivors of the tower fire.

Understandable - but that lays bare a considerable weakness in her ability as a leader and hey, there's a few things expected of me in my job that don't play to my natural strengths and make me uncomfortable. Do I avoid them - no, I suck it up - hell I actively look to do them more often because that is what will improve my performance.

Whatever her personal preferences it looks dreadful that she didn't meet with the victims and Corbyn did - and it plays into the narrative that she lacks the human touch. With the reputation of the Tories it even plays into the narrative that she didn't want to have to rub shoulders with those dreadful poor people. I don't buy the latter for one second, but her avoidance of spontaneous human interaction because it makes her uncomfortable is, quite frankly, pathetic.

I think you have a point there but I don't think it's about 'in front of a camera' per se. Those close to her have repeatedly stated that she is no good at thinking on her feet and needs everything pre-prepared and scripted and is uncomfortable with anything else.

That is certainly how it appears from my observations as well and matches why she'd be reluctant to attend live debates and even reluctant to meet with the survivors of the tower fire.

Understandable - but that lays bare a considerable weakness in her ability as a leader and hey, there's a few things expected of me in my job that don't play to my natural strengths and make me uncomfortable. Do I avoid them - no, I suck it up - hell I actively look to do them more often because that is what will improve my performance.

Whatever her personal preferences it looks dreadful that she didn't meet with the victims and Corbyn did - and it plays into the narrative that she lacks the human touch. With the reputation of the Tories it even plays into the narrative that she didn't want to have to rub shoulders with those dreadful poor people. I don't buy the latter for one second, but her avoidance of spontaneous human interaction because it makes her uncomfortable is, quite frankly, pathetic.

The thing is if we accept this charitable interpretation of her actions what on Earth is she doing taking on the role of Prime Minister? Her performance on Newsnight simply reinforced the point. Whether its introversion or arrogance it makes her utterly unsuited to her job and she has further damaged her credibility still further.

The thing is if we accept this charitable interpretation of her actions what on Earth is she doing taking on the role of Prime Minister?........

Keeping the seat warm for someone else.......

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Oh please, Boris is calling on the party to back her because he doesn't want to be the one stuck with the blame when Brexit is a shambles. May has been forced to ditch her pet policies like grammar schools to postpone backbench revolts for a little while. May has demonstrated she's a shambolic leader and now she's a hostage to the whims of every backbencher with an axe to grind. I think this article is a lot closer to reality than your whistling in the dark:

Balance, that's all. All I am doing is countering incessant, puerile attacks. Constant sniping. Trivial point scoring. No-one here seems capable of just treating her as just a decent but fallible human being trying to do her best. If she'd have met survivors (are you very sure she didn't?), you'd have said she should have met the emergency services. She's a Tory, though, and we all know that Tories are the scum of the earth, and hate wogs, poofs, women and the Irish.

There is no doubt Thereas May is a fine decent human being. Unfortunately, she has poor leadership skills (compare and contrast with HRH Queen Elizabeth II, who when she asked, 'Where do you come from?' of a survivor did not skip a beat when the response was 'Afghanistan' - where her grandson was deployed with the army - and didn't flinch when a loud keening and wailing could be heard).

She is the Tories 'Gordon Brown'. Good as a civil servant but pisspoor in empathy and getting on with people from all walks.

I think you have a point there but I don't think it's about 'in front of a camera' per se. Those close to her have repeatedly stated that she is no good at thinking on her feet and needs everything pre-prepared and scripted and is uncomfortable with anything else.

That is certainly how it appears from my observations as well and matches why she'd be reluctant to attend live debates and even reluctant to meet with the survivors of the tower fire.

Understandable - but that lays bare a considerable weakness in her ability as a leader and hey, there's a few things expected of me in my job that don't play to my natural strengths and make me uncomfortable. Do I avoid them - no, I suck it up - hell I actively look to do them more often because that is what will improve my performance.

Whatever her personal preferences it looks dreadful that she didn't meet with the victims and Corbyn did - and it plays into the narrative that she lacks the human touch. With the reputation of the Tories it even plays into the narrative that she didn't want to have to rub shoulders with those dreadful poor people. I don't buy the latter for one second, but her avoidance of spontaneous human interaction because it makes her uncomfortable is, quite frankly, pathetic.

Absolutely, and she had to wheel out the newly designated 'deputy prime minister' Damien Green, ex DWP State Secretary minister, and best friend from college days, to speak up in her defence on national tv.

I feel sure she'll be on her way out very soon. The Queen's Speech will be an embarrassment.

Her Maj has already upstaged her at Grenfell House and Ma'am must be felling really grumpy that the date now coincides with her beloved Ascot and her great love of horse racing.

I can see Ma'am being extremely withering and that will be too much for poor Theresa to bear.

I voted "Until the next General Election," purely because I can't see anyone being self-destructive enough to take over from May without immediately calling a General Election.

Dave

Originally Posted by Blue Bubble

Me too ...

It might not come to a leadership challenge if she decides to step down. She's lost a lot of support from the base of her party who thought she made a mess of the election, she's unpopular with at least a certain wing of the Tory party for her line on Brexit, and she is now reviled by much of the general public. This goes beyond politics and party squabbling which she may have felt she could ride out.

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

Which doesn't explain why she chose to run for the job in the first place, or call an election where campaigning makes unscripted contact with the public and the media pretty much mandatory.

PM may be one of those jobs that you don't know whether you'll be any good at it until you are actually doing it. I mean, who'd have thought Gordon Brown would be so utterly useless?

If the son of a Duke, grandson of a Viceroy, from one of the richest families living in one of the biggest stately homes in the country put himself up for the job now, can you imagine what Corbyn would say, and what his chances might be? Winston Churchill didn't make a bad fist of it though......

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

It might not come to a leadership challenge if she decides to step down.......

It won't ever come to a leadership challenge. As soon as someone starts thinking out loud that this is the time to have a go at getting the job, she'll step aside. She knows she couldn't win a leadership election. Her primary (party) function now is to hand over the party in as good a state as possible to her successor.

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

There is no doubt Thereas May is a fine decent human being. Unfortunately, she has poor leadership skills (compare and contrast with HRH Queen Elizabeth II, who when she asked, 'Where do you come from?' of a survivor did not skip a beat when the response was 'Afghanistan' - where her grandson was deployed with the army - and didn't flinch when a loud keening and wailing could be heard).

She is the Tories 'Gordon Brown'. Good as a civil servant but pisspoor in empathy and getting on with people from all walks.

It won't ever come to a leadership challenge. As soon as someone starts thinking out loud that this is the time to have a go at getting the job, she'll step aside. She knows she couldn't win a leadership election. Her primary (party) function now is to hand over the party in as good a state as possible to her successor.

How is the highlighted any different to a leadership challenge? I'm saying that she may step down even before someone starts doing that.

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

A challenge is an actual formal procedure, with the submission of signatures to the Chairman of the 1922 committee, or the Party Chairman, I believe. I presumed you were talking about such a procedure because of the terminology you used.

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

A challenge is an actual formal procedure, with the submission of signatures to the Chairman of the 1922 committee, or the Party Chairman, I believe. I presumed you were talking about such a procedure because of the terminology you used.

Well, okay, but I think that misses the point of what I was saying when I was responding to two posters who argued that she will last until the next general election because nobody would want to take over from her.

My point was that she may step down even before anyone makes a formal - or informal - challenge.

Her premiership is beset by more than the average partisan attacks or internal party dissatisfaction. Widespread public anger is likely to do for her.

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

Well, okay, but I think that misses the point of what I was saying when I was responding to two posters who argued that she will last until the next general election because nobody would want to take over from her.

My point was that she may step down even before anyone makes a formal - or informal - challenge.

Her premiership is beset by more than the average partisan attacks or internal party dissatisfaction. Widespread public anger is likely to do for her.

I think she might very well have been instructed to stay on, so will do until pushed nudged.

__________________OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcarehttp://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

I think she might very well have been instructed to stay on, so will do until pushed nudged.

Well if she keeps making things worse that push may not be long coming. Mind you anyone whose expecting a successor to do better is being wildly optimistic. Boris Johnson is a disaster waiting to happen every time he makes a comment and David Davis makes May look charismatic.

Both Andrew Marr and Robert Peston appeared almost as surprised to see the chancellor as he was to see them. These were the interviews that none of them had expected just 10 days ago. The exit poll must have been a bittersweet moment, Marr observed.

“Not at all,” said Hammond hesitantly. “It was a very bitter one.” But his eyes suggested otherwise. For the first time in months there were faint flickers of life.

Quote:

Then he set about taking his revenge. Not with the reckless abandon that George Osborne had shown the previous week, but with a more plodding – yet, in its own way, equally devastating – takedown. Sometimes half-hearted support can be more brutal than a full frontal attack. Yes, the general election campaign had been utterly dismal, but what else could you expect when the Tory party had had a bunch of halfwits in charge of it? If it had been left to him, he would have spent much more time telling the country how well the economy was doing.

__________________OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcarehttp://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

There are lots of things to criticise DD for, but this isn't one of them. The fact that he is wrong on so many issues would be a good place to start, I reckon.

I hope the next leader is someone somewhat younger, and without the baggage of the current leading personalities. I'm not saying Dominic Raab, necessarily, but someone like him, who is obviously very able.

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Even the Tories aren't stupid enough to launch a leadership challenge with everything else going on. Bojo is a very clever man, a middling politician and would be dreadful as party leader. Very similar to his potential Labour opposite number.

I'll put this here, rather than in the Huge Fire in London thread as this clip of the British House of Cards has appeared on social media making parallels between Theresa May's response to the Grenfell Tower fire and Francis Urquart's response.

There are of course some notable similarities between both the number killed, the blame on underfunding, and the prime minister's failure to show adequate public sympathy with the victims, and May might have wished she had watched this episode recently. Although she comes across more hapless than calculating.

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

I'll put this here, rather than in the Huge Fire in London thread as this clip of the British House of Cards has appeared on social media making parallels between Theresa May's response to the Grenfell Tower fire and Francis Urquart's response.

There are of course some notable similarities between both the number killed, the blame on underfunding, and the prime minister's failure to show adequate public sympathy with the victims, and May might have wished she had watched this episode recently. Although she comes across more hapless than calculating.

Oddly I'd commented in the run up to the election that she seemed to be basing her premiership on 'To Play the King'. Obviously, Urquhart actually got a majority in his election. That coincidence hadn't occurred to me.

I'll put this here, rather than in the Huge Fire in London thread as this clip of the British House of Cards has appeared on social media making parallels between Theresa May's response to the Grenfell Tower fire and Francis Urquart's response.

There are of course some notable similarities between both the number killed, the blame on underfunding, and the prime minister's failure to show adequate public sympathy with the victims, and May might have wished she had watched this episode recently. Although she comes across more hapless than calculating.

Well the Panorama programme on the fire tonight is not going to help her. Turns out the government had been promising a review of fire safety standard after a previous fatal fire at a tower block 7 plus years ago and despite constant prodding from a parliamentary committee it never happened. The committee was still pressing the matter in April of this year.

Well if she keeps making things worse that push may not be long coming. Mind you anyone whose expecting a successor to do better is being wildly optimistic. Boris Johnson is a disaster waiting to happen every time he makes a comment and David Davis makes May look charismatic.

I think if there was a obviously better alternative, May would have been out the morning after the election. Problem is the Tories have a definent lack of capable leaders with public appeal. Labor is not better off in that respect.

__________________Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Why do these fallen leaders hang on like limpets? We had Ceaucescu (remember him?), Gaddaffi, Gordon Brown, Margaret Thatcher and now the impotent automaton Theresa May, programmed to come out with annoying robotic sound bites.

Why do these fallen leaders hang on like limpets? We had Ceaucescu (remember him?), Gaddaffi, Gordon Brown, Margaret Thatcher and now the impotent automaton Theresa May, programmed to come out with annoying robotic sound bites.

Why don't they leave with dignity, like David Cameron.

Heavy is the head that wears the throne.

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

Why do these fallen leaders hang on like limpets? We had Ceaucescu (remember him?), Gaddaffi, Gordon Brown, Margaret Thatcher and now the impotent automaton Theresa May, programmed to come out with annoying robotic sound bites.

Why don't they leave with dignity, like David Cameron.

Cameron's speed leaving office, and even quitting parliament, effectively impaired his dignity. Dignified events tend to be more measured in their rhythm.

It's not very dignified to think, "Hell I lost. This is a real mess and I'm getting out of it right now. Where's the emergency exit?"

Cameron's speed leaving office, and even quitting parliament, effectively impaired his dignity. Dignified events tend to be more measured in their rhythm.

It's not very dignified to think, "Hell I lost. This is a real mess and I'm getting out of it right now. Where's the emergency exit?"

How long before we watch 'developing news' on tv showing a distraught Theresa May cowering in the garden of No.10, with helicopters whirring overhead, with Hammond and Osbourne with their long knives in the wings?

Tomorrow's broadsheets are saying the Conservative-DUP alliance is on the brink of falling through, with DUP making bullying noises.

I think it was more a case of, 'You want Brexit? Then you take responsibility for negotiating it.' Why should he have stayed on to be the whipping boy for a policy he didn't believe in?

Because he said he would?

__________________"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

Frankie Boyle was absolutely lacerating with some of his comments on May in his latest show. Hes fast becoming the closest thing we have to an actual political commentator in this country. Odd that he gets away with it on the BBC.

How long before we watch 'developing news' on tv showing a distraught Theresa May cowering in the garden of No.10, with helicopters whirring overhead, with Hammond and Osbourne with their long knives in the wings?

Tomorrow's broadsheets are saying the Conservative-DUP alliance is on the brink of falling through, with DUP making bullying noises.

In dealing with the parliamentary wing of the Orange Order, May seems completely out of her depth, as if she had no idea who these people are, and what they stand for. It will be to her credit (for we must give it where it's due) if she puts an end to her attempts to recruit the DUP to her cause. So maybe Her Majesty won't have to rave about poofs and Fenians after all, in her Gracious Speech.

In dealing with the parliamentary wing of the Orange Order, May seems completely out of her depth, as if she had no idea who these people are, and what they stand for. It will be to her credit (for we must give it where it's due) if she puts an end to her attempts to recruit the DUP to her cause. So maybe Her Majesty won't have to rave about poofs and Fenians after all, in her Gracious Speech.

May is facing a legal challenge over the DUP support as it is claimed it breaches the terms of 'impartiality' in the Good Friday Agreement.

A judicial review could go up before the supreme court, as it's to do with constitutional matters.

Quote:

Theresa May is facing a landmark legal challenge over her proposed deal with the Democratic Unionist party on the grounds that it breaches the Good Friday agreement.

An experienced legal team, which has been involved in constitutional challenges, is planning to apply for a judicial review of the deal once it is announced, the Guardian has learned.

High court judges would be asked to examine whether the pact breaches the British government’s commitment to exercise “rigorous impartiality” in the Good Friday agreement.

In addition, there is a row brewing over election expenses. Unlike mainland parties, Norn parties do not have to declare donations (for security reasons), hence rumours abound about darker forces channeling funds through Norn.

As an example DUP were given £400K to take out a 'LEAVE' advert in METRO'. Plus they misdeclared their election expenses, as did the Conservative party (luckily for them, the CPS declined to prosecute).

Big question is, people TOLD May (including Sinn Fein) the alliance was a breach of the GFA. Does she not have any advisers on this?

Theresa May will be the first Prime Minister since 1974 to go into the Queen's Speech with a minority government and the first in a hundred years to delay Her Maj.

The Queen will arrive at Parliament in a car, rather than horse-drawn carriage
There will be no royal procession into the House of Lords chamber and the Queen will wear "day dress" rather than robes
Her crown will be driven to the Lords in its own car, but she will wear a hat instead
It is the first state opening with "reduced ceremonial elements" since 1974
This was agreed because of timing issues caused by the snap election - rehearsals clashed with Saturday's Trooping the Colour event

I wonder if this reduction of "ceremonial elements" has been performed at the Queen's initiative, and is intended as a symbolic reprimand to Theresa May. Anyone here knowledgeable about these matters of protocol, and their hidden meanings?

ETA I note also that "Queen's Speech 2017: May promises 'humility'". Well, she has plenty to be humble about. Maybe she's trying to stop the Queen turning up in a minicab, and making the speech wearing jeans and a t-shirt.

In the case of May, I think it is because anybody significantly better is nowhere in sight in Tory Leadership.

I think it more to do with the poison chalice that she has left her successor. Who in their right minds would want to take on the job in these circumstances?

__________________The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.